Brown v. State of New York
- Colleen McMahon
- 1:19-cv-09628
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 4
In Brown v. State of New York, Judge McMahon denied Noel Brown’s federal challenge without prejudice because he had not completed state review.
Noel Brown, whose federal challenge to his state conviction was denied without prejudice, and the State of New York, which remained the respondent.
What happened
In Brown v. State of New York, Noel Brown challenged his New York conviction in a federal petition while incarcerated. He was convicted after trial of two counts of second-degree criminal possession of a weapon and sentenced to seven years in prison followed by five years of post-release supervision.
The court explained that people challenging state convictions in federal court must first give the state courts a full opportunity to review their claims. Brown’s direct appeal was not complete: the Appellate Division had extended his time to appeal, and he had not yet finished the available state review.
Judge Colleen McMahon denied Brown’s petition without prejudice because it was filed too early. The court also declined to issue a certificate allowing an appeal and denied permission to appeal without paying filing fees.
The detailed version
- Brown v. State of New York · No. 1:19-cv-09628
- Colleen McMahon
- Nov. 12, 2019
Background
Noel Brown, who was incarcerated in SCI Somerset in Somerset, Pennsylvania, filed a pro se petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. He challenged his April 22, 2019 conviction in the New York Supreme Court, New York County. Brown had been convicted after trial of two counts of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, a class C felony. He received a seven-year term of incarceration followed by five years of post-release supervision. Brown paid the $5 filing fee.
Exhaustion requirement
Section 2254 generally requires a person challenging a state-court conviction to exhaust available state remedies before seeking federal habeas relief. Exhaustion means giving the state courts the first opportunity to review the claimed errors. The court stated that a petitioner must wait for the Appellate Division to decide the direct appeal and, if adversely affected, seek permission to appeal to the New York Court of Appeals. Any claims raised in certain collateral motions also must be fully pursued through the available state appellate process.
The court determined that Brown had not completed his direct appeal. On August 13, 2019, the Appellate Division had granted him 180 days from receipt of the complete record to perfect his appeal. The court therefore concluded that Brown had not fully exhausted his state-court remedies. Although Brown described steps he had taken regarding post-conviction motions, those steps did not establish that the state judicial system had completed its review of the errors raised in his federal petition.
Ruling
Judge Colleen McMahon denied the petition as prematurely filed and, in the conclusion, denied the application for a writ of habeas corpus without prejudice. The court stated that Brown could file a federal habeas petition after fully exhausting his state-court remedies through the New York Court of Appeals. The court also ruled that a certificate of appealability would not issue because the petition did not make a substantial showing of a constitutional violation. In addition, the court certified that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to appeal without paying the required fees.
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.